SFraser's Training Schedules for FM10

[DocSander]

That's great advice. But what do you mean by 'For now, in order to tune down the workload you might consider adding a small (f.e. 0.2 of 0.5) negative value into the user preferred focus box' and how do you do it? Thanks

This is simply meant as a workaround until ProZone and I will post an updated version with an option to tune down workload according to your personal preferences...

What I mean is that negative values are allowed in the user preferred focus box.

So if you think that your preferred focus of +1 STR, ATT, BAL and DEF (like in the previous example of ron.e) adds too much workload, you might wanna enter +0,5 STR, ATT, BAL and DEF and -0.5 for all other categories... In other words, reduce all categories by half a focus point or so...

Hope this clears things up...

Ok facman, you just beat me there... But you're right, except that I'd reduce all categories by the same amount in order to maintain balance...

[DocSander]

...i wanted to improve his tec attributes.

In line with the example of ron.e's players a few posts before.

Step 1, choose the correct position, in this case it's easy: AMC.

Step 2, choose the correct career stage, in this case: developing.

Add user preferred focus values: in the case the categories containing technical attributes (like ATT, BAL, SET).

If the workload is too high for you taste, reduce all categories by a small focus of 0.2 or just how much you like to reduce the workload...

Et voila...

Good luck and let us know...

[facman]

I've had my players on the basic schedules since August 09 in my Everton savegame (with the modifications for the miscount in attributes). It is now late April 2010, and I've just started to analyse their improvements (which will take a while since I am away over Easter! )

Anyway, I decided to start with Jack Rodwell. Jack has been on the Developing MC regime and has had no injuries all season. Using Genie scout, I found his CA has increased from 137 to 147 in the time period. This is a big jump in 9 months and I would imagine is largely down to him playing 20+ games for me and also picking up his first 5 England caps. Looking at his attribute increases (sorry I haven't got any screenies to hand) I found that the following training areas picked up increases:

Strength - 2 attribute increase (out of 3)

Aerobic - 2 attribute increases (out of 5)

Tactics - 5 attribute increases (out of 5)

Ball Control - 3 attribute increases (out of 4)

Defending - 3 attribute increases (out of 3)

Attacking - 1 attribute increases (out of 2)

Shooting - 1 attribute increase (out of 3)

Set Pieces - nil change (out of 5)

What does this tell me?

Well, the basic schedules are non-role specific. SFraser is very clear on this, so you would expect attribute increases across the board. Well, we definitely get this. The only area we don't see any increase is in Set Pieces, and thats because if you look at the training regime the slider is on a big fat 0!

The regime has 4 "focus points" on both Strength and Aerobic, which is higher than on any other area, and Rodwell is young (19yo), so surely we should see large gains in these areas? Well, we see moderate gains - 4 stats go up by 1 point, 4 stats don't change. I guess that for a central midfielder, strength and aerobic stats are difficult to increase?

Tactics, Ball Control, Defence and Attacking all have 3 "focus points" in the default regime. All 5 tactical attributes go up, some by +2, 3 of the 4 Ball control increase, all 3 of the defending attributes increase by +1. 1 of the 2 attacking attributes increases, and 1 of the 3 shooting attributes increases. This means that 13 out of 17 attributes increase! Excellent! What interests me most though is that the 4 stats which don't go up are Technical stats (Passing, Technique, Finishing and Long shots), which should be on a linear progression and therefore more likely to increase than mental stats. The mental stats should be hardest to train for a 19 year old, but they all go up!

Overall, my findings for Jack Rodwell are that the generic developing MC regime does indeed produce general, non-specific attribute increases just as it is designed to. I'm going to look at the rest of the squad when I can, and then for next season I'm going to develop focussed player/role specific regimes and test them for a year!

Hope this is in some way useful!

[facman]

Ok facman, you just beat me there... But you're right, except that I'd reduce all categories by the same amount in order to maintain balance...

Very good point, I need to remember that!

[SFraser]

Yes that is dissapointing with the Physical attributes. I guess a focus bias of +1 is not high enough.

Results like these re-open the discussion for attribute weights being involved in some way in training, but clearly that impact is no greater than +/- 100% and certainly not the +/- 1000% you would expect to see from non-proportional CA gains.

There is however another potential source for these discrepancies, and that is Coaches. I would be interested to know the attributes of your Coaches facman to see if there is any potential correlation.

[rolo]

Would you say this is a better schedule that TUGS?

Cheers.

[DocSander]

Results like these re-open the discussion for attribute weights being involved in some way in training, but clearly that impact is no greater than +/- 100% and certainly not the +/- 1000% you would expect to see from non-proportional CA gains.

Funny to see this coming from you, SFraser...

Weren't you a fierce opponent of the 'attribute weights influence training sliders' theory? Your previous evidence that this way accounted for behind the scenes was quite compelling at the time...

[jim morrow]

Perhaps Strength training is not only focussed on player attributes but with other player things, like we can see that strength training can react with match condition and match exercise of the player.

IF you push hard strength training during pre-season, you will see that the player will get his match exercise more sooner than with a lower strength training (bad thing is that he will tired more quicly)...So there is a chance that Strength training deal with attributes but with other things too.........

[SFraser]

Funny to see this coming from you, SFraser...

Weren't you a fierce opponent of the 'attribute weights influence training sliders' theory? Your previous evidence that this way accounted for behind the scenes was quite compelling at the time...

The evidence points against the idea of attribute weights being directly involved in training. There are no +1000% non-key attribute gains over key attribute gains. Attributes such as Positioning and Off The Ball tend to go up fairly equally irrespective of Position in all players. You certainly do not see Finishing going up 10x faster than Positioning in a Centreback.

That does not mean that there is no complex mechanism at work bringing attribute weights down to a more logical rate of increase. I suggested that attribute CA gain is proportional to CA weight as that is what the evidence suggested to me, but there are certain examples where attributes are not behaving according to theory.

I have not done much investigation into the impact of coaches on training, and I would assume that there is a significant impact from coaches on training. Untill coaches are investigated properly I cannot rule out a complex mechanic of dealing with attribute weights, but I think it is unlikely.

Irrespective of all of that though, it is absolutely clear that the direct, unmodified attribute weights play no role in training. It is completely false to think that each attribute receives an equal share of CA when CA is gained, and that key attributes require 10x more to increase. That would produce situations that would destroy players, let alone the ability to train them.

[Jenko_EFC]

Thanks everyone, I am now making schedules for almost every player and it is so much better shaping players your own way, I was a bit nervous at first as I didn't want them to go horribly wrong but I find it much better now. Am I right in thinking that Tactics with a focus of only 2 will not increase as much as Attack on focus 5 even though they are both on slider notch 10?

[DocSander]

Thanks everyone, I am now making schedules for almost every player and it is so much better shaping players your own way, I was a bit nervous at first as I didn't want them to go horribly wrong but I find it much better now. Am I right in thinking that Tactics with a focus of only 2 will not increase as much as Attack on focus 5 even though they are both on slider notch 10?

Yes you are, on a general principle. Other factors involved are coaches and player age (influencing the rate of development of physical and mental attributes).

And it's a good thing to notice that this thread and this tool enables people to finally shape their own players through training...

[el_magico89]

hi again, when is going to be released an update of the schedules?

pls would be nice if anyone could upload the improved schedules.

have tried to create one by myself but its not working well.

i want my pastore who is my playmaker to develop mentally.

he has everything but 10 on concentration and 11 on anticipation.

created a schedule for him and he now lost 1 point in decisions.

would be nice if anyone could help me.

have a nice day

[ron.e]

This is simply meant as a workaround until ProZone and I will post an updated version with an option to tune down workload according to your personal preferences...

What I mean is that negative values are allowed in the user preferred focus box.

So if you think that your preferred focus of +1 STR, ATT, BAL and DEF (like in the previous example of ron.e) adds too much workload, you might wanna enter +0,5 STR, ATT, BAL and DEF and -0.5 for all other categories... In other words, reduce all categories by half a focus point or so...

Hope this clears things up...

Ok facman, you just beat me there... But you're right, except that I'd reduce all categories by the same amount in order to maintain balance...

So just to confirm something. If i add another unit to 3 categories then i have to -1 to all the others if the overall workload is to high? Thanks

[nick1408]

I will probably ask some silly questions here as I am a training numpty. I have read the entire thread but I am lost. I don't understand how I can take one of SFraser's training schedules (e.g. MC Developing) and tweak it effectively for say a DM or a box-to-box mid.

I downloaded the training help spreadsheet but without an instructions page I am a bit lost to be honest. I can see the training sliders moving when I change things but I was more interested in something where all the stats for a player are listed and I change the value for an increase or decrease in the sliders that way.

If I understood the whole training concept I would do something like This:

- choose the type of player (DM in this case) and the career stage (developing)

- excel would then change the graph to the basic training schedule to MC developing

- the user then selects next to each stat what they would like to emphasise (say tackling, strength) and stats that less emphasis will be on (say, aerobic)

- the graph will now change accordingly

It is only as I don't understand the whole training concept here that I do not do this myself, or at least give it a go. Hey, it may not be able to be done but I do need some help. Is there a help file somewhere that can be posted? I do need some training help!

[DirtyACE]

Correct

The User Defined Focus is where you can type in your own Focus values to create your own schedule. If SFraser's Focus is included ('yes') the two Focus numbers will be added together. If SFraser's Focus is not included then it's 100% your own schedule.

Thanks for the explanation. Can you tell me though, what would be the point of having both, SFraser's and User focus active at the same time? What can be achieved through this? I'm just wondering since the option to have both focuses/foci in use is available. Sorry if this seems like an ignorant question, but I just don't quite understand.

[robertgee]

Hey all.

This thread is brilliant and has given me so much information on training that has proven to be a great help in my game. I tend to change training so it maintains strong areas and develops weak areas. eg a player might be physically a beast but technically poor so target schedules for that.

One question I have though is how many clicks/what position on the slider will maintain the physical attributes for strength and aerobic training as mentioned above I have just got a 20yr old who is a monster physically and would love to give him the highest amount of technique work I can as feel it would be wasting training to improve physically.

[el_magico89]

lol so there isnt anyone, who is regarding my posts?

its now the third time and nobody is answering my questions.....

[robertgee]

For those after the tweaked schedules, I have uploaded the set I made changes to. They can be downloaded from here:

http://www.mediafire.com/?4dxhmftnl0m

These are the ones I am using, and have had the changes I listed above made to them.

I hope they help those of you who weren't sure what changes to make.

lol so there isnt anyone, who is regarding my posts?

its now the third time and nobody is answering my questions.....

is that hwat you need?

[el_magico89]

thx mate, thats what i was looking for.

well where should i let a 23 year old first team player train? developing AM or first choice?

have a nice day

[Longblade]

These training Schedules have worked really well for me, thanks alot SFraser. I was hoping you could help me with a problem player though. I have a regen AML/R with some really good stats, but he's low on Flair, Decisions, and Off the Ball. Can you offer any advice on changing a schedule specifically to help him? Thanks a lot regardless.

[xiaoicy]

sorry for replying so late and maybe abit out of point, but thanks to SFser and Prozone and those who contribute greatly to this training schedule. it helps alot of me to improve my players stat greatly and right on the spot. i have tested on the schedule and creating my own since SFser stated his thread. anyway just want to say thanks and doesnt want to use it and didnt appreciate to those who work so hard on this.

thanks.

[fman1]

I have been reading this thread but have got a little lost along the way.

I have downloaded the updated training schedules and i am going to use these as a base to try and create individual schedules for each player. I used to download a training schedule and forget about it but reading this it shows how you can shape youngsters into the best they can be.

Thanks to all the guys who have put a lot of effort into this.

[Guest roberto922]

You, sir, are a legend. This is doing wonders for my 32 year old CB, and my kids are progressing faster than before.

[el_magico89]

what do you think, when i have to put a player into the the veteran schedule?

do 30+ players belong to veterans or should i put them, when theyre 32+?

[Guest roberto922]

Yeah 32/33 seems the right time to me, that's when their age starts having a real effect.

[SFraser]

The Veteran schedules are designed to slow down the decline of Stamina while reducing Overall Workload to boost condition recovery. Meaning they can play longer/more often and wont lose Stamina so quickly which will basically end their careers if it is not addressed.

The other alternative is the Developing Schedules. It seems counter-intuitive but they are both Stamina training intensive. One is at a high workload, the other is at low. If your player isn't playing regularly I would put him on developing unless you want to end his career. If he is playing regularly then Veteran is the best choice as it will allow him to play more often.

[facman]

Yes that is dissapointing with the Physical attributes. I guess a focus bias of +1 is not high enough.

Results like these re-open the discussion for attribute weights being involved in some way in training, but clearly that impact is no greater than +/- 100% and certainly not the +/- 1000% you would expect to see from non-proportional CA gains.

There is however another potential source for these discrepancies, and that is Coaches. I would be interested to know the attributes of your Coaches facman to see if there is any potential correlation.

At a different computer than normal as I'm away over Easter, but I remember that my Aerobic coach has 5 stars and my Strength coach has 4.5 stars. Tactics is also 4.5 stars, and the rest are all 4 star.

[makie1874]

sorry to bother you with this question lads but once you have downloaded the file what do you do

iv played fm since it came out but never really edited modified or done anything atol to the game

[StormenDK]

I have been using the standard schedules that SFraser made for my Bath City squad. But it is resulting in too many injuries. Most likely because of the basic facilities my team have.

So to compensate for that, i would like to reduce the workloads. So I basically just remove 1 focus (for example) from each category to keep the same balance but at a lesser workload?

[fman1]

Made a schedule for Sergiy Kryvtsov as i wanted to try it out. I started him on the schedule on 29/9/09 and took next stat reading on 26/1/10. He is a first team regular and i an in the Championship in England. My coaches are mostly 3 stars but i was impressed with his increases.

My Schedule was

Training Base Focus

Strength 3 x 4

Aerobic 5 x 4

Tactics 5 x 4

Ball Cont 4 x 4

Defending 3 x 5

Attack 2 x 2

Shooting 3 x 2

Set Pieces 5 x 0

He was on the last notch of Heavy for overall workload.

Stats increased were

Technical

First Touch + 1, Heading + 1, Marking + 1, Passing + 1, Tackling + 1

mental

Anticipation + 2, Composure + 1, Concentration + 1, Creativity + 1, Decisions + 2, Flair + 1, Influence + 1, Positioning + 2, Teamwork + 1, Work Rate + 1

Physical

Acceleration + 1, Jumping + 1

I think that is a pretty good increase for 4 months training and he was not tutored. Strange that Flair and Creativity went up though.

I am going to try a schedule for an attacking youngster i have next, thanks to all who contributed to this thread as i feel i am starting to get to grips with it now, just had to read the thread a couple of times.

[facman]

OK, so I finished my first season as Everton, using the basic schedules from the OP, corrected to take into account the correct attributes for each training area.

I have started to analyse the results, and here is what I have so far........ (I have only looked at players who did not have significant injury problems in the year, so, for example, Mikel Arteta and Phil Jagielka were not considered as they spent more than 6 months out with injury). I haven't put in the actual stat increases to save space, but I can list them later if people are interested.

Developing players:

4 players have been considered (Rodwell, Gosling, Vaughan, Coleman). All 4 players increased CA by 10 or greater over the season, and all players had at least 35 points in between CA and PA at the start of the season. Rodwell and Gosling were on the Developing CM schedule, Vaughan on Developing ST and Coleman on Developing FB.

Strength training

All schedules had a focus of 4 on strength. All players saw stat increases.

Average stat increase over the season = 0.9

(n.b. how did I work out the average increase? Simple really........Rodwell had 2 stat point increases in the strength category, Work rate +1 and strength +1. Gosling had 3 increases, Vaughan 3 and Coleman 3.

Therefore the total stat increase for all players = 2 + 3 + 3 + 3 = 11.

Strength has 3 attributes associated with it (strength, stamina and work rate), thus for 4 players gives a total of 4 x 3 = 12 stats.

Therefore average increase = total increase / total number of stats = 11/12 = 0.9)

Aerobic training

All schedules had a focus of 4 on aerobic. All players saw increases.

Average stat increase over the season = 0.6

Tactics

3 schedules had focus of 3 – average stat increase = 1.2

1 schedule had focus of 4 – average stat increase = 0.8

Ball Control

All schedules had focus of 3.

Average stat increase = 0.75

Defending

3 schedules had focus of 3 – average stat increase = 1

1 schedule had focus of 1 – average stat increase = 0

Attacking

2 schedules had focus of 3 – average stat increase = 0.75

2 schedules had focus of 2 – average stat increase = 0.25

Shooting

1 schedule had focus of 4 – average stat increase = 0.33

2 schedules had focus of 3 – average stat increase = 0.67

1 schedule had focus of 2 – average stat increase = 0.33

Set Pieces

3 schedules had focus of 0 – average stat increase = 0

1 schedule had focus of 2 – average stat increase = 1

Analysis

Non physical - A focus of 3 in any of the training areas gave a reasonable return over the year. The lowest return of any schedule with a focus of 3 was 0.67 in shooting. Tactics training gave the best average return, odd as it is a purely mental discipline and so young players should not get great returns. Set Piece training might be easier than any other but would need further testing.

Physical – A focus of 4 gave reasonable returns over the year. Strength training gave the best return. Work rate was the hardest stat to train in the strength discipline, unsurprisingly as it is a mental stat. Aerobic training gave a lower return. None of the 4 players had an increase in jumping, and only 1 had a pace increase. Acceleration, Balance and Agility were the easiest to train.

Conclusion

A focus of 3 looks to be the minimum to guarantee a reasonable return in the non physical disciplines, with the exception of Set Pieces, which gave a reasonable return with a focus of only 2. A focus of 1 or 0 gave no return.

A focus of 4 gave a reasonable return in the physical disciplines.

Planned schedules for Season 2

Rodwell

Str x 3

Aer x 3

Tac x4

BC x 4

Def x 4

Att x 4

Sho x 4

SP x 2

This gives a total workload of 110 using the schedule design tool, which is the same overall workload as the basic schedules. I am hoping that this schedule will continue Rodwell's general training, but with more emphasis on the non-physical areas.

Gosling

Str x 4

Aer x 3

Tac x4

BC x 4

Def x 5

Att x 4

Sho x 0

SP x 2

I am hoping that this will allow Gosling to improve generally, but with emphasis on his defending

Vaughan

Str x 4

Aer x 4

Tac x4

BC x 4

Def x 0

Att x 0

Sho x 4

SP x 2

Vaughan needs to develop in particular areas if he is to become a good striker. I am abandoning his creativity and passing to focus more on the other technical areas

Coleman

Str x 3

Aer x 3

Tac x4

BC x 4

Def x 4

Att x 4

Sho x 4

SP x 2

Coleman needs to improve in the non-physical areas if he is to take over the starting full back role in a couple of years, so this schedule will hopefully produce a more rounded player.

[ProZone]

A very nice post indeed

This is exactly the sort of detail I like to see. If you get a moment, could you add the details of your coaches.

[facman]

A very nice post indeed

This is exactly the sort of detail I like to see. If you get a moment, could you add the details of your coaches.

no problem, I'll get the coach info and put it in with the 1st team schedule analysis - which I'm writing up at the moment.

[facman]

coach ratings as requested

Coach ratings

Strength……….Abando (5 star)

Aerobic………...Winsper (5 star)

Tactics……..….Holden (4 star)

Ball Control..…Chamberlain (4 star)

Defending….….Meco (4 star)

Attacking……….Round (Ass Man) (4 star)

Shooting…….….Farrell (4 star)

Set Pieces…....Prosinecki (4 star)

Veteran schedules

Only 2 players on veteran schedules, Sylvain Distin, 32 yr old CB (Veteran CB schedule), and Phil Neville, 33 yr old FB (Veteran FB schedule). Distin played over 30 games, and Neville over 20 starts and 10 as sub, so both were used a fair amount during the season. Interestingly, both players had an Influence increase of +1. Neither player played for their country during the season.

Distin

CA change = -2

Schedule:..........Average stat change:

Str x 4.................-0.33

Aer x 2.................-0.2

Tac x 4................-0.2

BC x 3..................-0.75

Def x 4.................0

Att x 3.................-0.5

Sho x 3................-1

SP x 0................. -1

Neville

CA change -7

Schedule:............Average stat change:

Str x 4.................-1

Aer x 2.................-0.6

Tac x 4................-0.6

BC x 3..................-0.75

Def x 3 .................-0.67

Att x 3 ................ -1

Sho x 2................ -1

SP x 3 ..................-1

So what does this tell us?

Well firstly, Neville is older than Distin, and played fewer games, so we would expect a bigger CA drop, which we get. We also get drops of -1 in 24 stats for Phil Neville, and 15 in Distin, which again is consistent with what we expect. So far so good

The stat losses are also fairly evenly spread across all of the training areas in Neville’s case, which again is what we would expect for a balanced schedule. The drops in Distin’s case are a little more uneven, especially the very small drop in aerobic stats, despite the schedule only having a focus of 2!

Set Pieces dropped by the same rate for each player despite being on a focus of 0 in the CB schedule and 3 in the FB schedule!

Let’s see what happen when we group the stat drops by Physical/Mental/Technical, rather than by training category.

Distin

Strength (3).....WR -1

Aerobic (5)......Pac -1

Tactics (5)......OTB -1

Ball Control (4).....Dri -1, Hea -1, Tech -1

Defending (3).....0

Attacking (2).....Cre -1

Shooting (3)......Fin -1, LS -1, Com -1

Set Pieces (5).....Cor -1, Cro -1, FK -1, PT -1, LT -1

Physical stat change = -1 (Pace) / 7 = -0.14

(Calc based on there being 7 physical stats – Str, Sta, Acc, Ag, Bal, Jum, Pac – Work rate is in the mental category)

Mental stat change = -4 / 9 = -0.44

Technical stat change = -10 / 14 = -0.71

Neville

Strength (3).....WR -1, Str -1, Sta -1

Aerobic (5)......Acc -1, Pac -1, Ag -1

Tactics (5)......Ant -1 OTB -1, TW -1

Ball Control (4).....Dri -1, FT -1, Hea -1

Defending (3).....Mar -1, Tack -1

Attacking (2).....Pas -1, Cre -1

Shooting (3)......Fin -1, LS -1, Com -1

Set Pieces (5).....Cor -1, Cro -1, FK -1, PT -1, LT -1

Physical stat change = -5 / 7 = -0.71

Mental stat change = -6 / 9 = -0.67

Technical stat change = -13 / 14 = -0.93

Looking at the 2 sets of results, we find that the technical stats decrease quickest, followed by the mental and physical stats, which decreased at a similar rate when averaged over the 2 players. The coaching ratings were higher in the physical areas than in the other areas, so this might account for the relatively lower than expected physical drop. If this is correct, then it is demonstrated that mental attributes will fall at a slower rate than the other attributes in older players.

Clearly, the balanced schedules are not intensive enough to maintain any of the attribute areas consistently, so perhaps we need to specialise the schedules in order to prioritise where we allow stat drops and where we preserve the attributes. Mental training areas such as Tactics should be prioritised for older players on Veteran type schedules.

Season 2 schedules

Distin & Neville

Str x 3

Aer x 3

Tac x 5

BC x 3

Def x 5

Att x 0

Sho x 0

SP x 0

I'm going to effectively abandon the Technical stats as we saw from looking at the Set Pieces training that having a focus of 3 didn't stop the stats from dropping, so I've concentrated on the mental stats, and defensive stats, with some on the physical side to try to keep them from dropping too much. I've kept some on Ball Control as I want to try to limit the losses to the heading stat.

[el_magico89]

hi guys,

just one question, ive folowed this concept and created a schedule for my defensive midfielders.

after a few feeks, i can see nearly in every attribute yellow/green arrows, which should be a sign for a well trained week.

well but which makes me a little bit suspicious is, that even my fellaini had these yellow arrows on tactic and aerobic, he lost a point in "off the ball" and "header"

what do you think, could be the reasons?

the other positions are running pretty well, i can even see many developments after 3-4 weeks, but only the fellaini case disturbs me

have a nice day

[IanPlant]

Hi guess I would like to congratulate you all on some great work 'WELL DONE'

I have started creating my own data base of my players but only know the basics of excel

This is the template

Player Version

The Training data is behind the picture and training graph

[el_magico89]

hi just got one question about schedules for center backs.

have created one without no shot training, cause i thought it would only be something for offensive players.

but in the description, its written, that it affects long shots,finishing and strenght of nerves in front of the goal.

well what i noticed after 4-5 months with the new schedule, is, that 2 of my defenders have lost points in strenght of nerves.

do you think, its important for a defender to have good stats in this category?

or does this category only affect attacking players?

would be nice if someone could help me.

thx

[facman]

do you think, its important for a defender to have good stats in this category?

or does this category only affect attacking players?

would be nice if someone could help me.

thx

Composure is useful for all players to have regardless of position, as it will allow them to remain calm in all circumstances. As far as defenders go it is useful if you want ball playing defenders who can start attacking play with good passes or running with the ball out of defence. If you want to play limited defenders whose only role is to win the ball from an attacker and play a short and simple pass to a midfielder then it is less important.

[el_magico89]

Composure is useful for all players to have regardless of position, as it will allow them to remain calm in all circumstances. As far as defenders go it is useful if you want ball playing defenders who can start attacking play with good passes or running with the ball out of defence. If you want to play limited defenders whose only role is to win the ball from an attacker and play a short and simple pass to a midfielder then it is less important.

hey thx for the quick answer, but why the hell is it not listed in the tactic category and instead of that in shot?

so I have to train my defenders shot category with the same intensity as tactic to just make them improve in composure?

well very ironical and absurd for me^^

what would you prefer?

[facman]

what would you prefer?

Personally, I don't bother training composure for my defenders, as I generally keep my defenders defending unless I have a corner.

[barka_legend]

Just a quickie, this has probably been asked and answered but I couldnt find it as I panned through so here we go.

Got a 23 year old Miles Addison for Villa, top top player, first teamer and fit.. Yet a few of his technical stats have dropped, most worryingly tackling has dropped by a point.

He has been in fantastic form, which is why this makes no sense. His moral is superb, there is no logic to it. He is on 1st choice CB training.

Any help would be great, Thanks.

[leaderoftheshed]

Loving the work put into this and that there is some intelligent probing of the theory behind these schedules.

I have a couple of things I would appreciate some thoughts on:

Using the 1 notch per attribute rule menas that there are slider positions you will never use - eg strength will only ever be at notch position 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 etc. But what happens if you place strength somewhere in between, such as at notch 13? Will you still get the benefits of notch 12 but no more?

Secondly re the age factor - its been said that technical is hard to improve in very young players, mental only really kicks i for older players and physical from 17-24. So what sort of improvement should you expect in 15-16yr olds?

[ArsenalFan7]

Few questions.

How come there is no CDM schedules?

What is a WF?

And why do 1st choice attackers focus so little on attacking and shooting?

[karax268]

actualy reading the thread would help

These are training schedules made on the principles of Sfrasers new theory of one notch per atribute. in attacking for example are only two atributes to be trained. In aerobics there are five.

So when aerobics are on notch 15 and attacking on notch 6 all atributes are trained equally.

And about the schedules those were made for Sfrasers team (man utd i think) for this to work properly you'll have to modify the schedules to suit our own players.

[SUCK IT]

From people who have used them, how good would you say these are at developing players

[karax268]

I have very good results so far.

[SUCK IT]

Thanks mate

[LeeAce]

My thoughts exactly.

To be fair though I remain unconvinced by my own explanation of the Training Arrows. The Training Arrows do not directly correspond to anything easilly observed though there are similarities and patterns, and this would suggest that the Training Arrows describe something different and more complex than the rest of the Training information, including attributes changes.

For example the pattern of the Training Arrows follows the same pattern as Training Progress from month to month, but crucially the magnitude of Progress change is not replicated exactly in the Training Arrows. An attacking player with a small increase in Tactics Progress, a negligable increase in Defending Progress and a large increase in Ball Control Progress may show identical low magnitude green Training Arrows. This suggests that the Training Arrows take into consideration Position Attribute weight while Training Progress does not.

It's great to know what the differences between two displays are, but if you don't know exactly what either display is actually showing then knowing the difference between them is of very little use.

I think the training arrows indicate the change of training levels in each category for each player compared to a previous set point (monthly/weekly). What I noticed is that when a player is injured, all the arrows goes down. When that player just came back from injury, all the arrows goes up. When a player has been training week in and week out on the same schedule, no arrows shows as there are no changes to the training levels in each category. Do a tweak in your training schedule and the arrows will show up again indicating arrow drops in areas you reduced training and arrows gained in areas you increased training.

Did not do a real study but this has been my observations when I was tweaking with Sfraser's schedules.

[jim morrow]

Training arrows by training area is update weekly.....Green arrow means that the player is working well on this area. Red arrow means that there is a lack of work in this area...

But green doesn't mean that the player will see his attributes increasing automatically, and the same for red ...It's just information about "work" not "performance".

[leaderoftheshed]

I think the worked examples are really helpful. here is my offering:

http://img638.imageshack.us/i/001lk.png/

Groves is at the start of his career and has bags of potential - one of the best players of his genenration with the potential to be as a good as aguerro my scouts tell me.

He has good mental attributes and is remarkably good at set pieces. Unfortunately he is clearly lacking in quite a few key attributes for his position - passing, finishing and off the ball, while there is also a serious problem with his strength, and to a lesser extent his stamina.

Groves should be entering the stage of his development where physical stats show the greatest improvement, and this is clearly the area I need to focus on most. I also want to try to focus PA into improving key stats sucha s passing and finishing, while maintaining his set piece proficiency. Mental stats such as off the ball while have to wait until he is a bit older and mental gains are easier to achieve.

As a starting point I have taken SFrasers AMR schedule for developing players, which has the focus below.

STR 4

AER 4

TAC 2

BAL 4

DEF 1

ATT 3

SHO 3

SET 3

Groves needs serious work on his stamina and strength, so I will increase his focus in STR by 1. I would like to go further but dont wat to run the risk of injuries. To add emphasis to improving his passing and finishing I will also add focus to ATT and SHO. To mitigate this, im reducing BAL by one as his stats are already at a good level for his age.

So the new schedule is

STR 5

AER 4

TAC 3

BAL 3

DEF 1

ATT 4

SHO 4

SET 3

Its still a very intensive schedule. If I feel its too intesive I will probably reduce aerobic. I cant afford to drop strength as groves needs strength and stamina above all else. Indeed, I may need to increase STR more to see the increases needed for him to reach the phyiscal condition to compete at the highest level.

Im sure others will have different views on how they would set up this schedule. Thoughts welcome.